Saturday, April 9, 2016

The Causes of Religious Violence and Ways to Combat Them

By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

What causes religious violence? Is it a propensity for violence that
motivates most religious

terrorists, or is it poverty, underdevelopment and
despair? Or could it be radical religion
that motivates fanatical zealots to kill unbelievers?Or could it be all of the above?In any event, unless we know the cause of
religious violence, we cannot combat and defeat it.

Fareed Zakaria has asserted that terrorists
are radicals with a propensity for violence before they become religious. The Aga Khan, the leader of Ismaili Muslims,
has asserted that “Islam and terror have not the slightest thing in common” and
that “Poverty, underdevelopment and despair are without doubt among the most important
causes.” But those Muslims recruited by ISIS
from the U.S. and Europe are neither criminals nor victims of poverty. They are educated Muslims who have become radicalized.

It appears that radical religion
is the primary cause of religious violence, but the Obama administration has obscured
that cause by denying the religious nature of ISIS and referring to it as
ISIL. In order to counter the radical Islamism
of ISIS, moderate Muslims must undermine its legitimacy with Islamic doctrines
of peace and justice; but that requires the freedoms of religion and speech
that are absent in Islamic cultures. It
took the Reformation and the Enlightenment to undermine the legitimacy of an
oppressive Church, but most of its many variants now embrace libertarian
democracy, human rights and the secular rule of law. Islam is overdue to experience its own
reformation and enlightenment.

The first requirement in
combatting religious violence is a government that is willing and able to
enforce secular laws that prohibit violence, such as assault, rape, kidnapping
and murder. That applies to Christians
who kill abortion doctors, Jews who kill Palestinians, and Islamists who kill
unbelievers. Where ISIS, al Qaeda and
Boko Haram thrive and promote violence, governments are either unwilling or unable
to enforce secular law, and moderate believers don’t have the freedoms of
religion and speech to challenge the legitimacy of radical Islamism. It is a problem of legitimacy, and the moral
and legal standards of legitimacy are shaped by religion.

Standards of legitimacy define
justice, which is the ultimate measure of any religion; and when religious
radicals define justice with violence, religion fails the test of legitimacy. Radical Islamists assert that God’s justice is
defined by a sacred rule of law (Shari’a) that preempts libertarian democracy
and human rights and sanctifies violence.
But claiming that violence is the will of God doesn’t make it just; and where
ISIS, al Qaeda and Boko Haram thrive and commit their violence with impunity it
isn’t because most people believe it is God’s will, but because of ineffective
and illegitimate government.

In order to promote peace and
justice a religion must advocate standards of legitimacy, law and politics that
condemn violence and maintain peace, and in today’s world, that requires
libertarian democracy, human rights and the secular rule of law. Modern Judaism and Christianity have embraced
those principles of libertarian democracy and human rights, but in Islamic
cultures those libertarian principles are subordinated to the ancient and
immutable Islamic law of Shari’a, which includes apostasy and blasphemy laws
that preclude the freedom of religion and speech.

Shari’a is remarkably like Jewish
(or Mosaic) law, which reflects their common Semitic roots, but since the
Enlightenment most Jews and Christians have subordinated their ancient
religious laws to the secular law and human rights of libertarian democracy;
and where those libertarian principles have prevailed, radical religious
movements have not gained political traction. (Hitler’s Third Reich and
Stalin’s Russia were oppressive regimes that arose in Christian cultures, but
were not religious in nature)

A minority of Christian and Jewish
fundamentalists continue to assert the supremacy of their holy laws over the secular
laws and human rights of libertarian democracy; and they frequently cause
political repercussions, as with their support of Donald Trump and Senator Ted
Cruz in the U.S., and with periodic outbursts of violence against Palestinians
in Israel. But so far religious fundamentalists
have remained a minority in libertarian democracies and unable to undermine human
rights and equal justice under law.

Judaism, Christianity and Islam
are pluralistic religions that include progressive, conservative and fundamentalist
sects, and most Muslim leaders are quick to disclaim any relationship with
radical Islamist violence. Nevertheless,
radical Islamism is a primary motivating force for ISIS violence. In libertarian democracies that violence can
be controlled through the enforcement of criminal laws, and cooperative efforts
between law enforcement and Muslims can identify and deter young Muslims
attracted to ISIS.

In Dearborn, Michigan, law
enforcement has worked closely with Muslims to identify and deradicalize young
Muslims attracted to ISIS. In Europe
there is less assimilation of Muslims, and neighborhoods like Molenbeek, a
suburb of Brussels, Belgium, have become havens for radical Islamists and
produced terrorist attacks. More
assimilation of Muslims and cooperative efforts with law enforcement are needed
to counter Islamist violence in Europe.

The real challenge for combatting
Islamist violence is not in the U.S. or Europe where Muslims are minorities who
can be assimilated to libertarian values, but in Islamic cultures where governments—even
those in Islamic democracies—subordinate secular law and human rights to
Shari’a with its apostasy and blasphemy laws, and are either unable or
unwilling to prosecute the violence of radical Islamists.

Religious violence can thrive
wherever religious laws take precedence over libertarian human rights and the
secular rule of law. Until Shari’a is
considered a voluntary moral code of legitimacy for Muslims rather than a code
of positive or coercive law, it will preclude libertarian democracy, human
rights and the secular rule of law in Islamic cultures, and Islamist terrorists
will be able to promote their violence with distorted interpretations of Shari’a.

Notes and
References to Related Blogs:

On related blogs, see Religion
and Reason,
December 8, 2015; Faith and Freedom,
December 15, 2014; Is Religion Good or
Evil?, February 15, 2015; Religion
and Human Rights, February 22, 2015; Faith
as a Source of Morality and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy, April 12, 2015; De Oppresso Liber: Where Religion and
Politics Intersect, May 2, 2015; Religion, Human Rights and National Security,
May 10, 2015; Moral Restraints on the
Freedom of Speech, May 17, 2015; Jesus
Meets Muhammad Today, June 14, 2015; Freedom
and Fundamentalism, August 2, 2015; Balancing
Individual Rights with Collective Responsibilities, August 9, 2015; How Religious Fundamentalism and Secularism
Shape Politics and Human Rights, August 16, 2015; The European Refugee Crisis and Radical Islam, September 6, 2015; The Power of Freedom over Fear,
September 12, 2015; Politics and
Religious Polarization, September 20, 2015;
Taking Lives and Liberty in the
Name of God, December 19, 2015; Resettling
Refugees: Multiculturalism or Assimilation? December 26, 2015; Who Is My Neighbor?, January 23, 2016; The Politics of Loving Our Neighbors as
Ourselves, January 30, 2016; The
American Religion and Politics in 2016, March 5, 2016; Religion, Race and the Deterioration of Democracy in America, March
12, 2016; Religion, Democracy, Diversity
and Demagoguery, March 26, 2016; and The
Freedom of Religion and Providing for the Common Good, April 2, 2016.

For a compilation of Islamic laws (Shari’a) and
Jewish Mosaic Law, see the Appendices to The Teachings of Jesus and Muhammad
on Morality and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy (the J&M Book),
posted in Resources at http://www.jesusmeetsmuhammad.com/ at pages 469-651.